falloutfanonfandomcom-20200222-history
Fallout Fanon Wiki talk:Tranquility Lane Rules
what does WIP mean? It means "work in progress", I'll edit it to say that. Composite 4 16:28, 16 June 2009 (UTC) Oh thank you kind sir. You guys are nicer then the Naruto Fanon wiki. maybe I might join. I'm a Machinima fan too Alright, so, with the WIP tag things, that only counts for articles that are actively being worked on, right? I've got 3 right now, but I've also got a bunch of red links. Those red links don't count towards my WIP count, do they? --Twentyfists 16:39, 16 June 2009 (UTC) No, they don't. Composite 4 16:41, 16 June 2009 (UTC) I must bring up the "Seperate timeline" thing for RPs. It won't work. It can't work. Solely for the fact that it's how almost every major thing on this site has based on for the past several monthes. If it's unofficial, then we've got to remove everything from RPing in the articles or be called hypocrites. I think you see my point here. Plus it would kill activity on the site. KuHB1aM 10:12, 17 June 2009 (UTC) I am sure as hell Run didn't choose that rule or even get told about it. I really and truly do not think you, C4, should be the one choosing RP rules because you do not participate in any. So, now you have to go on a deleting spree and delete all of the RP articles, (Western Brotherhood of Steel Outcast Division etc.) and now Bren isn't dead because he didn't even meet Jacob! //--TehK 11:03, 17 June 2009 (UTC) And now the Crusade is still in far north-western D.C., the Outcasts never left Fort Independence, Jacob's page will be shortened by half a mile, blah blah blah blah.... yeah, the list goes on and on and on. The rule doesn't make sense. KuHB1aM 13:14, 17 June 2009 (UTC) Wait,does it mean that it's unofficial to canon or fanon? Fniff1 14:43, 17 June 2009 (UTC) Actually, thats written into the timeline with Jacob and Bren's articles. I agreed to this after the Liberty Prime incident. I'll be expanding that rule soon. //--Run4urLife! 14:55, 17 June 2009 (UTC) XD Oh, how you guys jump to conclusions. There is a tidbit up there about the rules being worked on, I hope some of you read that. And TK, you're in no position to tell me what I can and cannot do, not to mention I discussed that rule with Run4 before submitting it. Composite 4 15:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC) (This is Kuhblam; don't feel like logging in.) C4, I don't require sarcasm. If I wanted sarcasm, I would have gone to my dad and asked him if the sky is blue, or if the sun is in outer space. Duh I read the unofficial part. If it was official, do you think I'd be trying to push my point on changing something? Anyhow, Run4's edit works for me. I rest my case. 01:27, 18 June 2009 (UTC) You don't require it? Well, I'll be sure to ask you next time I want to be sarcastic. Damn, there I go again! Composite 4 01:31, 18 June 2009 (UTC) *Sigh* 01:39, 18 June 2009 (UTC) For a person in power, C4 really does insult people a lot.--Zilabus 22:01, 6 July 2009 (UTC) "Do not make a canon character and put them in a situation after their canon appearances." Does this mean I can't idly mention them? Jetholt (Jetty) 17:53, 20 July 2009 (UTC) :That's ok, but don't make something batshit insane, like Frank Horrigan showing up to someone's birthday party and playing Guitar Hero or such. //--Run4urLife! 17:56, 20 July 2009 (UTC) ::So is my character being brought up by Confessor Cromwell OK? Jetholt (Jetty) 18:00, 20 July 2009 (UTC) I'd say that isn't okay, giving a canon character a child is not kosher. [Composite 4] (My Talk) :Adopted Child. //--Run4urLife! 18:04, 20 July 2009 (UTC) That's okay then. [Composite 4] (My Talk) Thanks Guys. :D Jetholt (Jetty) 18:08, 20 July 2009 (UTC) Ibram Chase, destroy him! //--TehK 18:19, 20 July 2009 (UTC) Yes being the great-grandson of a canon character is realy putting the canon character in a non canon situation :DVegas adict 18:35, 20 July 2009 (UTC) :Well, C4 just said "I'd say that isn't okay, giving a canon character a child is not kosher." //--TehK 19:14, 20 July 2009 (UTC) Timeline Alright, lemme get this straight. There's the "actual" fanon timeline and the "RP" fanon timeline. The actual fanon timeline follows canon to the letter, while the RP fanon timeline is the one used in RPs, and it diverges around the Siege of Fairfax or so. And this is so new users and non-RP pages will not have to conform to the standards set by RPs and the information that came from them. Is that correct? --Twentyfists 16:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC) You hit the nail on the head. Composite 4 17:52, 17 June 2009 (UTC) Thats about it. Made an edit that sets the RP Timeline as the mainstream, and to mark stuff as not part of it if you want to ignore the RPs in an article. //--Run4urLife! 20:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC) No travel So someone cant go from the northen point of america into canada or from texas to mexicoVegas adict 20:56, 13 July 2009 (UTC) :I think he means continental. //--TehK 21:02, 13 July 2009 (UTC) ::Probably. It's common sense really. So Vegas, in a situation where common sense might come in handy, please borrow someone's common sense, as you display a disturbing lack of your own. //--Run4urLife! 21:29, 13 July 2009 (UTC) Cursing? Any rules about language? --Mgranaa 00:49, 14 July 2009 (UTC) :Depends on the context. //--Run4urLife! 01:16, 14 July 2009 (UTC) Curse if you want, just make sure you don't sound like a cock doing it. Composite 4 There are some spelling errors on here. I'm not trying to be a douche, but I figure that I'd point that out, seeing as I cannot fix them myself. Sound0ut 11:43, 2 August 2009 (UTC) Like? [Composite 4] (My Talk) Move Couldn't this page be moved to Fallout Fanon Wiki:Tranquility Lane Rules. It makes more sense since it is a wiki-policy related page. //--TehK (tok) 20:37, September 10, 2009 (UTC) :Excellent point. //--''Run4My Talk'' 22:09, September 10, 2009 (UTC) New Rule How about a rule that reads something like this: --Twentyfists 03:40, November 12, 2009 (UTC) And while I'm at it, how about a rule stating "The quote template exists for a reason. Please use it." --Twentyfists 03:41, November 12, 2009 (UTC) Good idea. //--''Run4My Talk'' 06:50, November 12, 2009 (UTC) That rule could be written as "The canon has already been written, do not rewrite it." //--TehK (tok) 12:07, November 12, 2009 (UTC) Erm, when will the rules on Fallout: New Vegas show up?Seqeu0 13:50, November 2, 2010 (UTC) What do you mean? These rules apply to all articles. Composite 4 About the first idea, to not add reasons for the bombing. I think this would limit fanon ability, I mean, if someone writes about a pre-War event like sabotage or a Bay of Pigs style page, affecting America, China, or any other nuclear power, I do believe it would affect the reasons for the nuclear war. Now I do think that an articles concerning the straw that broke camel's back, should not be aloud. Why should one person be aloud to write an article dating Oct 22, 2077, "US Pres calls China's Pres's mother a butthead" and the next day, nukes? No one could get to write a page like that. That's my suggestion. '--Musiekutsueki (talk) 02:15, November 18, 2014 (UTC)' :You're commenting on a conversation that's several years old. The version of rules they were talking about editing don't even exist anymore. The latest version of the rules have been pared down quite a bit to avoid trying to cover every possible thing that could arise, since people whined about that.--OvaltinePatrol (talk) 07:52, November 18, 2014 (UTC) Clarification Needed I was reading over the rules and am starting to find them kind of limiting: *No large militarized groups. I suppose this is sort of linked with the No splinter cells of canon factions, such as the BoS, NCR, and the Enclave, which is understandable, as I'm sure that for the most part everyone and their brother that visits wants to do their version. However, what if, for example, someone were to create a group similar to the Boomers from F: NV? Would they qualify as a large militarized group or a just a very well-armed settlement? Which leads me to my next issue: *Limits to the size of the settlement Groups can't contol anything bigger than a moderate sized town? If that's going to be the limit (though I don't really think it should be), that's very subjective. What qualifies as a "moderate-sized town"? The Captain (radio) 19:19, December 9, 2010 (UTC) We leave that decision up to you as long as you remain reasonable in your decision. If it becomes obvious it's more than a moderate town we'll just let you know. Also, towns can naturally advance into bigger communities (as all towns do eventually) it's just a matter of providing a natural, plausible and believable story progression. Composite 4 Well alrighty then. The Captain (radio) 06:42, December 10, 2010 (UTC) There is no official Fallout 3 outcome canon Given all the ways there are to complete fallout 3, and there is no official evidence on the canon outcome, why should there be anyrule to follow those outcomes on the mainpage, why does one user get to decide the fate of megaton or paradise falls or Tenpenny tower? There shouldn't be any guidelines for the outcome of the events of fallout 3 until a future game establishes what occurred. --LordVukodlak 00:22, February 26, 2011 (UTC) :Some of it is intended to be neutral: didn't blow up Megaton or disarm the bomb, didn't take sides at Tenpenny Tower, etc. Others choices were made to remove their use as precedent: we don't want authors churning out fanon articles for androids, superheroes, and vampires.--OvaltinePatrol 00:32, February 26, 2011 (UTC) ::What do articles about androids, superhroes, and vampries have to do with what I said? absolutely nothing. In what world does an EU completely match up when it has more then one author. And if Fallout 1 and 2 are to be a judge, the canon outcome would all be a heroic lone wanderer not neutral. ::LordVukodlak 00:44, February 26, 2011 (UTC) ::::::You're complaining about our stance on Fallout 3's events. I'm explaining the thinking behind the rules we set up. Furthermore, it wasn't one person who decided this, it was agreed upon by the admins and our bureaucrat. If a future game specifically addresses these things, we can change and remove things as necessary as we had to do with the New Vegas articles after Fallout: New Vegas came out. In the mean time, our accepted canon is that the LW did the bare minimum to complete the story, diverging from the path only to destroy the most retarded stuff present in the game or to preserve the status quo. Finally there's a standard we're trying to maintain and allowing some of the more lore-unfriendly and ridiculous aspects of Fallout 3 stand as precedent for authors to base their creations on would be counterproductive. So in fact everything I said was relevant and apropos to your query, but feel free to keep copping an attitude. Nothing like alienating the most active admin to get things started on the right foot ^.^--OvaltinePatrol 00:59, February 26, 2011 (UTC) :::::::Its still not relievent, how are the events around megaton, tenpenny, paradise falls, arefu etc involve anything lore un-friendly. I'm not talking about vampires, superheroes or aliens(which are in fallout 1 albet dead). I don't appricate your smokescreen reponse. Why does it matter if one article is based off Paradise Falls or Megaton's destruction and another is off its survival. This doen't seam like a fanon wiki at all. And your attiude is no different then mine. All I'm saying is have your rules about no vampires, superheroes, aliens and other unlore friendly stuff but leave the rest of fallout 3 "canon" alone until there actually is some. :::::::LordVukodlak 01:15, February 26, 2011 (UTC) ::::::: It matters because if we go around letting one person base their article off of one outcome and another of another then how can we maintain any sort of cohesive fanon universe? If you don't like the way this fanon is set up you're more than welcome to not post. Composite 4 Name one cohesive fanon universe, and obviously I've changed my mind about posting here. LordVukodlak 01:32, February 26, 2011 (UTC) First of all, a cohesive and structured fanon universe makes it much easier and more fun for new members to try and create their own articles alongside those of other authors, and getting new and decent authors is what most wikis strive for. One universe makes sure the quality is maintained, whilst having a whole bunch of diverse universes makes it so much harder for readers to enjoy the fanon on this site. Secondly, try reading some of the state articles, like Texas and Louisiana.-----Seqeu0 11:27, February 26, 2011 (UTC) Too Many Rules This wiki has too many rules. Why can't you be just a little more lax about all of this? Pinguinus impennis 03:58, September 7, 2011 (UTC) :Can you be more specific?--OvaltinePatrol 04:34, September 7, 2011 (UTC) :It says that aliens aren't allowed, and intelligent animals must have joint approval from numerous users. Pinguinus impennis 02:22, September 8, 2011 (UTC) ::We're lax if we think you don't suck at this writing thing. But we've had bad experiences in the past with users who've used topics such as "aliens" and "intelligent animals" in the canon as a cover to write terrible articles. Poor quality is not what we're about. If you prove yourself as an able writer, we could grant you an exception, but we don't want to enable people to write poorly but allowing such things. It's just part of our quality rules. Also, such articles encourage overpowered factions and characters. Since we have a shared fanon universe, this has the potential to seriously hurt other user-created groups unless the writer can demonstrate the proper finesse to pull it off. --Twentyfists 02:36, September 8, 2011 (UTC) :Oh, I see now. We have something similar on Multiverses Wiki. How can I prove myself? And could you give me a brief overview of the fanon universes so far? Pinguinus impennis 02:55, September 8, 2011 (UTC) :Get some high-quality articles written strictly according to the rules and consistent with the overall style.--OvaltinePatrol 03:03, September 8, 2011 (UTC) :I can do that. So, can I start off by making some non-sapient animals? I had a cool idea for an animal called a Naked Mole Bear, and giant bats called Nightwings. Pinguinus impennis 03:10, September 8, 2011 (UTC) ::Write them up, and we'll see how it goes. If we've got comments or concerns, we'll voice them then. --Twentyfists 03:29, September 8, 2011 (UTC) ::OK, I made the Nightwings. Pinguinus impennis 03:38, September 8, 2011 (UTC) Adding the userspace createbox I set up Template:Userspacecreatebox a while ago for myself, and I thought it would be useful for other people since it would allow users to work on articles in their userspace at their own pace without worrying about deletion or sudden alterations without discussion. Users would be able to move the pages when they finish them. :Sascha Kreiger, Imperator des Sturmkrieg Sektor (Kaisar) 19:05, November 1, 2011 (UTC) Strict rules These rules treat the editor like they're on a damn leash. No aliens? Seriously? Also, why the hell CAN'T you make an article about a specific piece of equipment or chems? There are mostly NO explainations for why these rules are enacted. For a fanon wiki, you can't really make a lot of fanon. My advice? Change the rules. These regulations are WAY too strict and I've seen many fanon wikis that NEVER had rules like these. That's all I'm going to say. XtranormalGeek 14:35, February 17, 2012 (UTC) I agree with Xtranormal, Yes you need to be strict with mary sue articles, like super soldiers, ninja warriors...etc. But the wiki needs more flavour, adding equipement, chems should result in users creating company pages, etc. Expanding the wiki entirley, and hopefully bring more fans. --Sergeant Granite 19:46, February 17, 2012 (UTC) The rules are lax at the highly qualitative and popular Pip-Boy Fanon Wiki, perhaps that one's more to your liking? Seriously though, there has been too much drama and bickering in the history of this Wiki to continue hoping that the next contributor won't come here, still high on playing the Fallout-themed first-person shooters of late, to plunk down another cheap knock-off of the NCR or the Lone Wanderer/Courier. And please, don't get me started on aliens and the technology they bring to the table. Things like that are just begging to be abused - perhaps not by you guys, but the time our admins took their chances is long gone. --XterrorX 20:57, February 17, 2012 (UTC) :Also, I believe articles on individual equipment or chems were discouraged because not only did these articles result in stubs, most of them were also used by just one character or faction. Which begs the question why they weren't added to those respective pages in the first place. --XterrorX 21:12, February 17, 2012 (UTC) :I agree with Terror. On the Mass Effect Fanon, there are litterally 20 versions of Commander Shepard. I like this Fanon because most of the articles are well made and unique because of the strict rules. LMGVagabond 23:47, February 17, 2012 (UTC) :Lax? Are you kidding me? I've seen SEVEN official fanon wikis that have more leniant rules than this. I don't care if the articles will be stubs, the least you can do is let the editors have free range. That's what a fanon is about. I want to create fanon without having to worry about stupid bull**** like that. Sorry, gentlemen, but I'm staying true to my word. These rules are too strict. I know that probably doesn't matter to you, but at least show some damn courtesy for people who want to pour their ideas out for their fanon. XtranormalGeek 00:04, February 18, 2012 (UTC) This really should have been done on a forum, heck we already had one for rules discussion here; but what's done is done. I'll address the two salient points brought up. *'No aliens? Seriously?' Yes seriously, no aliens. What possible use for aliens in a Fallout fanon do you have? Mothership Zeta 2.0 vs. Your OC? An alien OC bumming around the wasteland? Alien ray guns for your OC? We don't particularly need any of that here. If you want to write a Fallout related story featuring aliens, ago ahead; we can slap a divergence tag on it and call it a day. *'Also, why the hell CAN'T you make an article about a specific piece of equipment or chems?' Perhaps you came across this fanon and believed that everything arbitrarily arose in a vacuum; but we actually came to these decisions based on history. Historically, articles about guns were dedicated to a single instance of a weapon tied to a single character or a weapon used only by a single faction. Furthermore, these weapons were frequently poorly considered (guns that shot bullets encased within a laser beam. energy weapons that had less energy output than a bowl of cereal with skim milk, weapons taken from Halo or other games, high-powered weapons that were only created to counter the latest over-the-top fanon power armor, etc.). Non-weapon equipment articles were similarly plagued with lack of attention to plausibility and detail. The manufacturer article rule was intended to increase verisimilitude within the fanon. Rather than having a single article for Senor Badass' one-of-a-kind Ultra-Deathray that he found in a bunker, waiting for him like Excalibur; we could expand the world for the benefit of other authors. You might find us a little more damned courteous, to turn a phrase, if you weren't so hostile. If you object to our structure, we've helpfully provided links to other Fallout fanon wikis on the front page of Tranquility Lane.--OvaltinePatrol 01:34, February 18, 2012 (UTC) I like the snide, unbecoming attitude you have. VERY impressive. -_- For your information, I wasn't being hostile, I was rigorously voicing my opinion. The truth is these rules are not lax. You may not be swayed by what I'm saying, but I feel that these rules are WAY too strict. Fanon wikis were meant to be more free than this, and this is definitely not free. Not even remotely close. No wonder this wiki only has 261 articles when the other FREE wikis have over 2,000 articles. I'll just find another wiki with a minutia of freedom unlike this. That's all I'm going to say. XtranormalGeek 03:49, February 18, 2012 (UTC) Hey look guys I can understand your concerns about rules. I also write on a fantastic wiki which is linked on the first page but I'll link it here as well. This site is great and I write there primarily. We're a great bunch to hang around and we'd love to have you on there. The fanfiction wiki is no where near as strict and you can write with a much larger amount of freedom. I hope you'll check us out. Homosursussus 03:51, February 18, 2012 (UTC) Homosursrssus, not to shit on your fanfic wiki, but the reason I prefer this wiki is because it is written like real canon. I can understand someone wanting to have more freedom, but for me, it's hard to enjoy fanon if everything around it is poorly written and unrealistic. However, everyone being up in arms against each other is really getting old. It's just letters on a computer screen, there's no reason to be angry. LMGVagabond 05:48, February 18, 2012 (UTC) Whilst digging around on the other fanon, I found this little nugget: "good thanks like hommosurrussus i would not want to go on tranqullity line because they are exetremeley streict about conenet in articles and thanks again. ''" See. They sound like ''really nice and witty people, don't they? You even seem to share some hobby's (complaining about TL)! ^.^ It seems like exactly the thing you need, so I don't see what the problem is. If you don't like it here, fine, just write your stuff somewhere else. You're allowed to complain, sure, but don't do it like some 12-year old if you want to accomplish something.--Seqeu0 07:17, February 18, 2012 (UTC) This is turning into a wiki vs wiki thing and that really wasn't my point. I was simply offering the users concerned with the rules a legitimate alternative to writing on this wiki. If you enjoy writing here more I'm glad and I'm not trying to change that, but if you're upset with the way things are run there are alternatives. That was what I was trying to point out. Are there lesser quality articles there? Absolutely but that's part of the greater freedom is that some users aren't up to TL writing standards. There are also some really great articles written on that wiki. I'm not trying to start a TL Fanfiction wiki war because I like both sites. What I want people to take away from my comments is that if you're upset with the way this wiki is run we'll take you in over there even if it's just to write one or two articles that you can't create here because of rules. Give us your super soldiers, your aliens, your vaults, your vampires, your multistate factions or whatever else you've always wanted to do. Homosursussus 13:16, February 18, 2012 (UTC) Seems like it could be a little too dictatorial I've recently started to agree a lot more with a lot of the rules here (Fallout is a much more restrictive universe than 40k), but I really think we should have the first two rules at a normal size font. [[User:Inquisitor Ehrenstein|'Inquisitor Sasha Ehrenstein' aus dem Sturmkrieg Sector]] ( ) 00:42, April 8, 2012 (UTC) :When there comes a day that people stop arguing and whining that they should be allowed write whatever the Hell they like, regardless of ripping off other media or cohesion with the setting (seriously, we've suffered everything from armour copied straight out of Halo, to massive armies, to bullets that make peoples' blood congeal, expand and blow the whole victim apart), the first two can be reduced to a normal font size. Until then, they stay large and in charge so that people can understand that if they stand in violation of rules, their "work" can be hauled in line with the universe in which they have chosen to set their fan material, or it will be eradicated. //--''Run4My Talk'' 21:15, April 8, 2012 (UTC) ::Yeah, I really hate it whenever people try to combine things from different fictional universes. It's tempting to spend 1k on a gaming computer to be able to play the game on par with the xbox and have fun with the mods, until you realize that nearly all the mods are either horribly non canon or completely game breaking. I've seen mods for massive underground bunkers in the center of the wasteland for use as personal command centers, with mobile command center trucks that you can drive around the wasteland. Talk about ruining the game. Of course here it's worse because you can't just opt to not play the mod. ::An even more important reason to ban crossover BS is that it's potentially illegal. I don't know the position of the owners of Fallout, but Games Workshop has a specific policy on fan created content (since they encourage it as part of the Warhammer hobby) and they explicitly state that you cannot use third party IP in relation to what they have created. I assume that the reason would apply to any fanfiction, since it's generally allowed for non-profit purposes to encourage interest in the subject, but having content from other video games could result in a severe conflict of business interest. (Fallout owners aren't going to allow their work to be used to promote Halo.) ::I also hate the use of canon characters in fanfiction, and writing about them is almost certainly going to lead to canon contradictions. In other words, they can't be able to do everything that fans write about them doing. [[User:Inquisitor Ehrenstein|'Inquisitor Sasha Ehrenstein' aus dem Sturmkrieg Sector]] ( ) 22:45, April 8, 2012 (UTC) Vault-Tek The correct spelling is Vault-Tec, not Vault-Tek. This is the most frequent spelling in the games, and the Fallout Bible also clarifies this explicitly. Юра15px|link=User talk:YuriKaslov 07:00, September 15, 2015 (UTC) Shouldn't the "present" be updated to 2287 because of Fallout 4? MongoosePirate (talk) 07:54, November 22, 2015 (UTC) :The game came out this month, I figure we should give it a little time before we start incorporating new lore.--OvaltinePatrol (talk) 09:58, November 22, 2015 (UTC) I KNEW THIS WOULD HAPPEN OP! but does this mean a huge new rewrite within the next few months? Austro-Hungarian Insurance salesman (talk) 16:57, November 22, 2015 (UTC) Haven't finished 4 (and dont have access to it for a few weeks) but it seems something should be done about the New Vegas guidelines since it was 'six years ago'? I dont think its refrenced in game, but should we assume an ending or not touch on it? I say the last part because no one really makes articles about the region anymore (thankfully), but the courier probably fought their way across the dam by now Austro-Hungarian Insurance salesman (talk) 23:03, November 30, 2015 (UTC) : Fair point. We need to come to a group consensus on what ending it ought to de. CaptainCain (talk) 04:00, December 1, 2015 (UTC) Suggestion Current "Present" - 2287, New Vegas has taken place but the canon outcome is yet to be known, the events of Fallout 4 have transpired however the Sole Survivor has yet to side with any one faction. (FTFY) MongoosePirate (talk) 08:00, December 25, 2015 (UTC) Revisions I know there's barely anyone left here to hear this except perhaps OvaltinePatrol, but I would like to make some revisions to the rules. They worked for us in the past when we had a dedicated base of users, but now some of them are just a hindrance. Like it or not, we don't appeal to the modern Fallout fandom and have suffered for it. At the very least, we need to take away much of the restrictions associated with power armor and Vaults. So, if no one opposes it, I will be making some changes to this wiki's rules. MongoosePirate (talk) 05:09, September 22, 2017 (UTC) :By all means, feel free to try some things out.--OvaltinePatrol (talk) 08:27, September 22, 2017 (UTC) Vault population Are vaults here allowed to have more than 1,000 people? ALL HAIL THE TOTMG -TOTMGsRock 07:36, October 4, 2017 (UTC) X-01 Power Armour The X-01 is a simple case of "new lore trumps old". It's unquestionably a pre-war design, built by the US Millitary/Government. And, while not explicitly stated, it's fair to say that it and the Enclave's Advanced Power Armour are one and the same Darthfish (talk) 21:02, November 10, 2017 (UTC) Its not just because of the lore conflicts that the X-01 is excluded in the rules (though you have to admit Bethesda was not very consistent with their own lore). It's also because of power creep, similar to alien technology. At best, the X-01 is a pre-War prototype/Enclave tech? that has a hazy origin and unclear numbers, and it's probably best if it didn't start popping up across the wastes on "lone wanderers". MongoosePirate (talk) 21:10, November 10, 2017 (UTC) Collaboration Given the recent kerfuffle, I had some thoughts regarding attaching collaborative works. *If a user wants to work with another or include that other user's fanon in one of their own articles, then they should ask permisison from that user on their talk page. That way there is no ambiguity regarding the intent *Explicit permission/approval needs to be given from the orignal creator. No response does not imply consent KayEmm (talk) 12:41, January 23, 2018 (UTC) Quick request for clarifcation What's the rules regarding connecting to other users' fanon? Even if it's just a mention on another article with a link that doesn't change/impact the fanon in question?--Darthfish (talk) 10:26, March 1, 2018 (UTC) :Assuming everyone is acting in good faith, rule 5 should cover it. A name drop here and there may be necessary from time to time.--OvaltinePatrol (talk) 14:47, March 1, 2018 (UTC) Fallout 76 With Fallout 76 ''rapidly approaching release, it’s likely that there will be a rash of new users creating content related to the game. Due to the game’s nature there are a few cases where the existing rules may need to be modified to better fit it. The following suggestions are based off rules from a MMO Roleplaying Community Wiki that I used to run. These rules (or close variations thereof) are common to many such communities. Characters The biggest single difference between ''Fallout 76 ''and previous instalments is that there is no one single central Player character. Instead ''all ''the Player Characters of ''Fallout 76 ''share a common moniker, '''the Resident '(or Residents). Save for the Overseer, every inhabitant of Vault 76 is a Resident the instant they leave the Vault and head out into Appalachia. The result is that unlike previous games, there is no one central protagonist that anyone could try to claim exclusive control over. Any two given residents are as canonical as each other, and could co-exist. I feel that it would be acceptable for users to create Vault 76 Residents as long as they follow a few simple guidelines. Besides simple common sense ones (Reasonable names, follow existing lore, etc etc) there are a few specific guidelines that should be followed. Writers should not try to claim control of canonical locations, events, or characters outside of the Resident. Writing something like “they found the overseer and nuked Flatwoods” would not fit within the game’s lore or the site’s rules. Interactions with other Residents is fine, as long as they again fit within lore and do not break any of the site’s rules. If a user wants to create multiple Residents, then that also should be fine as long as, again, they follow the same rules. Other Appalachia/West Virginia characters beyond Residents would be fine as long as they fit within the existing lore. A key part of that is that by 2102, every human in the region is dead (or mutated into a Feral Ghoul or Scorched); the last known occurrences of living humans in the region was November, 2096. No sentient/non-feral Ghouls have been discovered so far. Outside of humans, there are Super Mutants living in the region; as such, new characters would fit with the existing Lore. Factions and Groups Appalachia is home to several of its own factions; the '''Responders, '''the '''Free States '''and the '''Appalachian Brotherhood of Steel. '''In addition, the region also features Raiders, who were divided into a number of different bands. Of course, all of the above were wiped out, so any characters from such groups would need to be dead by 2102. Appalachia is also home to three other vaults; 63, 94 and 96. As yet, however, all three remain sealed and inaccessible with no clues as to the status of their inhabitants (or even if they are still inhabited). Locations This is probably the most straightforward; effectively, all of West Virginia is covered by ''Fallout 76. ''I don’t see that there would be issues with putting new locations in state, such as an abandoned factory or a raider camp. However, the usual care to locations accounted for in Lore, such as Morgantown or Harper’s Ferry should be applied. Events There are two major limits on events in Appalachia. The first is the death of the human population in 2096. The second is that ''Fallout 76’s ''story has not yet progressed beyond 2102. Unfortunately, I can’t really see any way around this other then to limit events in the region to that time. Much like how the Wiki’s current year is 2287 but events in New Vegas are stuck at 2281, Appalachia will haver to stay stuck at 2102 until we know more. Conclusion Honestly, I don’t think the Wiki’s rules as a whole would need to change in order to accommodate ''Fallout 76. ''As long as people follow the rules and above all else use some sense, I don’t see any problems with letting users create '''Residents '''as characters.